The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has cleared the path for former President Goodluck Jonathan to contest the 2027 presidential election, ruling that there are no constitutional barriers preventing his return to the nation’s highest office.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu, the court dismissed a lawsuit aimed at disqualifying the former leader, describing the legal challenge as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of the judicial process.
The Core of the Legal Challenge
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2102/2025, was instituted by an Abuja-based legal practitioner, Mr Jideobi Johnmary. He approached the court seeking a perpetual injunction to restrain Dr Jonathan from presenting himself to any political party for nomination, and to bar the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from accepting or publishing his name as a candidate.
In an affidavit of facts deposed by Mr Emmanuel Agida in support of the suit, the plaintiff argued that Dr Jonathan had already exhausted the constitutional limit of two tenures as president. The plaintiff contended that:
- Dr Jonathan had already been sworn into office on two separate occasions—firstly to complete the unexpired term of the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, and subsequently for a full four-year term following the 2011 general election.
- A victory in 2027 would mean Dr Jonathan would serve until 2031, thereby exceeding the cumulative statutory maximum of eight years permitted for an individual in the presidency.
- Being sworn in again in 2027 would unconstitutionally mark the third time Dr Jonathan would take the presidential oath of office.
Judicial Precedent and Lack of Locus Standi
In his final judgment, Justice Lifu rejected the plaintiff’s arguments entirely, pointing out that the definitive question of Dr Jonathan’s eligibility had already been thoroughly litigated and settled by the Court of Appeal. The presiding judge emphasised that lower courts remain strictly bound by the established precedents of higher appellate judicial bodies.
Furthermore, Justice Lifu ruled that Mr Jideobi completely lacked the locus standi (legal right) to institute the lawsuit, given that the practitioner had not suffered any personal loss or injury from the former president’s potential political ambitions.
“The suit is an abuse of court process,” Justice Lifu stated, subsequently dismissing a separate motion by the plaintiff requesting the judge’s recusal from the matter on the grounds of perceived bias.
By striking out the litigation, the Federal High Court has effectively removed the immediate legal clouds hanging over Dr Jonathan’s political future, as various factions within the political landscape begin structuring alliances ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Leave a comment